send-hook, folder-hook

2001-09-12 Thread Peter Lavender
Hi everyone, I thought I had this working, but seems that I have broken something, and I'm not sure I'm using send and folder-hook correctly. What I need to have happen is that my .sig changes, my From address is correct (which it is) and the reply-to: header is correct, and remove the vanitity

send-hook, folder-hook??

2001-09-12 Thread Peter Lavender
Hi everyone I have a folder that I have procmail chuck all email for my company's address into. When I send from this folder though, I want to get rid of the "vanity" headers (X-Operating-System and X-Uptime), but it doesn't work. Here's what i have: # Setup the defaults. folder-hook .set

Re: send-hook, folder-hook

2001-09-14 Thread David T-G
Peter -- ...and then Peter Lavender said... % Hi everyone, Hello again! % % I thought I had this working, but seems that I have broken something, % and I'm not sure I'm using send and folder-hook correctly. Did my hook examples and muttrc.* files help you? I was going to go back to a note I

Re: send-hook, folder-hook

2001-09-14 Thread Michael Tatge
Peter Lavender muttered: > I thought I had this working, but seems that I have broken something, > and I'm not sure I'm using send and folder-hook correctly. > > What I need to have happen is that my .sig changes, my From address is > correct (which it is) and the reply-to: header is correct, and

More send-hook (+folder-hook) questions (long)

2002-06-11 Thread Sweth Chandramouli
OK, I'm having lots of issues with send-hooks recently, it seems. My new project: trying to deal with my mailing lists correctly. I have a bunch of lists, each with its own folder under =lists, to which I'm subscribed. In my ideal situation, when I send mail to any of those lists, I wan

Re: More send-hook (+folder-hook) questions (long)

2002-06-11 Thread David T-G
Sweth -- Your description is a little convoluted. Please allow me to attempt to clearly restate your goal and confirm or deny the presentation. In =lists/mutt sending in general (to the list, to me, to your mom) From: mutt@yoursite In =lists/loganalysis sending in general (to the list,

Re: More send-hook (+folder-hook) questions (long)

2002-06-11 Thread Peter T. Abplanalp
On Tue, Jun 11, 2002 at 02:22:47PM -0400, Sweth Chandramouli wrote: [...sniiip..] > So, I'm totally confused now. What gives? i don't know. ;-) but i have a suggestion in the form of a question because i don't have time to play with it myself. is it possible to get rid of t

Re: More send-hook (+folder-hook) questions (long)

2002-06-11 Thread Rocco Rutte
[ you should try to avoid using tabs in mail/news ] Hi, * Sweth Chandramouli [02-06-11 20:30:56 +0200] wrote: > My new project: trying to deal with my mailing lists > correctly. I have a bunch of lists, each with its own > folder under =lists, to which I'm subscribed. Here, too, nothing specia

Re: More send-hook (+folder-hook) questions (long)

2002-06-11 Thread Sweth Chandramouli
On Tue, Jun 11, 2002 at 09:42:50PM -, mutt-users-digest wrote: > Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 14:04:03 -0500 > From: David T-G <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: More send-hook (+folder-hook) questions (long) > > Your description is a little convoluted. Please allow me to

Re: More send-hook (+folder-hook) questions (long)

2002-06-11 Thread David T-G
Sweth -- ...and then Sweth Chandramouli said... % ... % I'd say that that's accurate, except I'd change the % phrases "sending in general" to "sending in general except to another % list", which I think is what you meant anyways. It was; good enough. % ... % > folder-hook =3Dlists/mu

Re: More send-hook (+folder-hook) questions (long)

2002-06-11 Thread Gary Johnson
send-hooks to the end of its list of send-hooks. That can lead to unexpected behavior and make it difficult to get the behavior you want. One solution to that problem is to use the 'unhook send-hook' command as the first folder-hook command, like this: folder-hook . u